Wikipedia Could Add Checkpoint Layer To Curb Bogus Information Posting
Wikipedia. What would you ever do without it? It really makes you
wonder how difficult homework is these days given that nearly every
subject on the planet is covered in one form or another on the
know-it-all website. Of course, that "easy homework" is really only
easy if the information that one finds is accurate, and that's why the
site's founders are cracking down on misinformation in hopes of making
the pages we frequent so often more trustworthy.
In an effort to curb the rampant posting of bad information, the company is hoping to impose new restrictions on article editing, a move that will certainly anger those who favor a more hands-off approach yet please those who want a little more control from the men and women at the top. For sure, the choice to leave well enough alone or intervene is a tough one. The site was born out of a love for open information, and with its founders looking to keep a closer eye on content, it certainly makes you wonder if personal bias will ever enter the equation.
The changes aren't set in stone just yet, but it's suggested that while anyone will still be able to edit articles, the changes won't be approved and posted until a seasoned and trusted Wikipedia author checks it for accuracy. The site is currently testing the process, and if it's successful, it could apply to all entries within the next month or so. Thankfully, you don't have to be a Wiki expert to be one that signs off on changes; in other words, the creators are just looking to add a small screen in order to prevent bogus information from being posted. If information is entered and someone that's trustworthy feels that nothing is wonky, it's probably good to go. So long as this whole process doesn't slow down the rapid-fire updates, we're 100% fine with it. More accuracy in the information we digest daily? Sure!
In an effort to curb the rampant posting of bad information, the company is hoping to impose new restrictions on article editing, a move that will certainly anger those who favor a more hands-off approach yet please those who want a little more control from the men and women at the top. For sure, the choice to leave well enough alone or intervene is a tough one. The site was born out of a love for open information, and with its founders looking to keep a closer eye on content, it certainly makes you wonder if personal bias will ever enter the equation.
The changes aren't set in stone just yet, but it's suggested that while anyone will still be able to edit articles, the changes won't be approved and posted until a seasoned and trusted Wikipedia author checks it for accuracy. The site is currently testing the process, and if it's successful, it could apply to all entries within the next month or so. Thankfully, you don't have to be a Wiki expert to be one that signs off on changes; in other words, the creators are just looking to add a small screen in order to prevent bogus information from being posted. If information is entered and someone that's trustworthy feels that nothing is wonky, it's probably good to go. So long as this whole process doesn't slow down the rapid-fire updates, we're 100% fine with it. More accuracy in the information we digest daily? Sure!
